SEARCH FINESCALE.COM

Enter keywords or a search phrase below:

Aircraft Trivia Quiz

728379 views
7409 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    July 2006
  • From: San Francisco, CA
Posted by telsono on Thursday, April 12, 2007 1:31 PM

hudskit

Would the last bombing raid for the B-17 be during the 1956 Arab Israeli conflict. November 4th 1956 against Egyptian positions in Gaza.  The Israelis also used Gloster Meteors, P-51D's, and Dassault Super Mysteres. Egypt had Vampires, IL-28's and MiG 17's among others.

Mike T.

Beware the hobby that eats.  - Ben Franklin

Do not fear mistakes. You will know failure. Continue to reach out. - Ben Franklin

The U.S. Constitution  doesn't guarantee happiness, only the pursuit of it. You have to catch up with it yourself. - Ben Franklin

  • Member since
    December 2005
Posted by hudskit on Thursday, April 12, 2007 5:16 PM

Close enough , Mike. The last mission was indeed in Gaza and the accompanying bombers were C-46's used as bombers by throwing bombs out the cargo doors. 

                                      It's all yours, Mike

Regards, keith

This whole workin' for a living thing does get in the way of so many things....
  • Member since
    July 2006
  • From: San Francisco, CA
Posted by telsono on Thursday, April 12, 2007 6:27 PM

Thanks Keith;

The Italians have a tradition of naming squadrons after famous and fallen pilots. After the Armistice the Axis allied RSI had named one of their bomber squadrons after a pilot famous for his exploits with torpedoes flying the SM 79. He was shot down off of Corsica and was missing and presumed dead.

Unknown to them, he survived the crash and was rescued by the Allies. When fit for duty he was made a commander of an Italian squadron flying Martin Baltimore bombers. He died later on ground looping one of these aircraft.

The RSI were very embarassed about the pilot flying against the Axis forces that they re-nmaed their squadron.

Who was this pilot?

Mike T.

Beware the hobby that eats.  - Ben Franklin

Do not fear mistakes. You will know failure. Continue to reach out. - Ben Franklin

The U.S. Constitution  doesn't guarantee happiness, only the pursuit of it. You have to catch up with it yourself. - Ben Franklin

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • From: San Francisco, CA
Posted by telsono on Saturday, April 14, 2007 11:41 AM

In guess a hint is in order. The pilot in question received the Gold Medal of Honor after being declared missing and presumed dead. This was the highest Italian medal to be awarded at that time.

Mike T.

Beware the hobby that eats.  - Ben Franklin

Do not fear mistakes. You will know failure. Continue to reach out. - Ben Franklin

The U.S. Constitution  doesn't guarantee happiness, only the pursuit of it. You have to catch up with it yourself. - Ben Franklin

  • Member since
    April 2005
  • From: Baton Rouge, LA
Posted by T_Terrific on Monday, April 16, 2007 10:38 AM

 

 Would that be none other then "The Great Carlo Emanuele Buscaglia"?

Tom Cowboy [C):-)]

P.S.

I really liked this one. It had layers of trivia, including the Italian Armistice which preceeded the Unconditional Surrender of Germany, as well as a former axis pilot that "crossed over" before the total end of hositlities.

Good one Thumbs Up [tup]

Tom TCowboy

“Failure is the opportunity to begin again more intelligently.”-Henry Ford

"Except in the fundamentals, think and let think"- J. Wesley

"I am impatient with stupidity, my people have learned to live without it"-Klaatu: "The Day the Earth Stood Still"

"All my men believe in God, they are ordered to"-Adolph Hitler

  • Member since
    April 2005
  • From: Baton Rouge, LA
Posted by T_Terrific on Monday, April 16, 2007 3:48 PM

Well, unless Mr. Telsono says otherwise, I do believe that I have the next turn. Big Smile [:D]

Which carrier-based U.S. Navy fighter often had its landing gear removed(struts,wheels,etc) in order to provide for more fuel tanks for greater range.

Now remember, a carrier-based aircraft is not a float or a seaplane, or an amphibian.

Of course the trick to this one is how it got by without it's usual undercarriage.

Hint:

The usual provided undercarriage was mainly used for land-based strips, as this plane's aircraft carrier did not have a typical flight deck.

Tom Cowboy [C):-)]

Tom TCowboy

“Failure is the opportunity to begin again more intelligently.”-Henry Ford

"Except in the fundamentals, think and let think"- J. Wesley

"I am impatient with stupidity, my people have learned to live without it"-Klaatu: "The Day the Earth Stood Still"

"All my men believe in God, they are ordered to"-Adolph Hitler

  • Member since
    January 2003
  • From: Barrow in Furness, Cumbria, UK.
Posted by davros on Monday, April 16, 2007 3:56 PM
Would that be the Sparrowhawk as carried by the dirigble USS Macon?
  • Member since
    July 2006
  • From: San Francisco, CA
Posted by telsono on Wednesday, April 18, 2007 8:27 PM

I am sorry for not responding back earlier as I have been out of town on business and couldn't get to an online connection before now. Tom had the correct answer. I liked the irony of being honoured by the opposite side.

Mike T.

Beware the hobby that eats.  - Ben Franklin

Do not fear mistakes. You will know failure. Continue to reach out. - Ben Franklin

The U.S. Constitution  doesn't guarantee happiness, only the pursuit of it. You have to catch up with it yourself. - Ben Franklin

  • Member since
    April 2005
  • From: Baton Rouge, LA
Posted by T_Terrific on Thursday, April 19, 2007 8:38 AM

 You got it Mr. Davros Thumbs Up [tup] 

That's OK Mike.

As you may have noticed, I was slow in getting back myself.

Since I am an enginering college grad from"'way back", Monday's shooting incident at Virginia Tech kind of had me "in shock" for a couple of days this week when I finally heard about late Monday. I still feel very deeply concerned about the terrible situation, so I am no one to fuss about the other guy being "out of pocket" for a nice weekend or something.

Give us a nice one Mr Davros. Wink [;)]

Tom Cowboy [C):-)]

Tom TCowboy

“Failure is the opportunity to begin again more intelligently.”-Henry Ford

"Except in the fundamentals, think and let think"- J. Wesley

"I am impatient with stupidity, my people have learned to live without it"-Klaatu: "The Day the Earth Stood Still"

"All my men believe in God, they are ordered to"-Adolph Hitler

  • Member since
    January 2003
  • From: Barrow in Furness, Cumbria, UK.
Posted by davros on Friday, April 20, 2007 5:52 PM

The worst part of getting the correct answer is coming up with a new challenge however here it is.

Although he later designed innovative aircraft and weapons he originally started work in a different area of aeronautics. Can you name him, what did he originally design and, perhaps trickier, where did he do this design work. As a little hint; the place was mentioned in a film about one important bit of his work.

 

  • Member since
    April 2003
  • From: Edgware, London
Posted by osher on Saturday, April 21, 2007 11:06 AM
I'm going to guess Willy Messerchmitt, who designed gliders, before designing fighter planes, etc.
  • Member since
    July 2006
  • From: San Francisco, CA
Posted by telsono on Saturday, April 21, 2007 1:02 PM

I would say Jack Northrop who started out as an aeronautical draftsman with the Loughead Brothers and then Douglas before becoming a project engineer. Later he would start his own company.

 I am revising my answer to Hugo Junkers who desighned gas engines and other equipment including a Kalorimeter during the late 19th century. His family had a textile business which he didn't participate in. It wasn't until 1908/09 when he joined the experimental flights of Prof. Hans Reissner.

Mike T.

Beware the hobby that eats.  - Ben Franklin

Do not fear mistakes. You will know failure. Continue to reach out. - Ben Franklin

The U.S. Constitution  doesn't guarantee happiness, only the pursuit of it. You have to catch up with it yourself. - Ben Franklin

  • Member since
    January 2003
  • From: Barrow in Furness, Cumbria, UK.
Posted by davros on Saturday, April 21, 2007 2:03 PM
None of those three is the answer I seek. I thought the film hint would give it away but obviously not. Keep on trying.
  • Member since
    April 2003
  • From: Edgware, London
Posted by osher on Sunday, April 22, 2007 1:27 PM

OK, Barnes Wallis, an engineer, but who designed geometric aircraft (Weslley, Wellington, Warwick), but is most famous for the 'bouncing bomb' the Upkeep bomb.  I've been to his design studio, at, oh, I can't remember the museum (it's a WWII airfield), in Yorkshire.  Certainly, in the 1950's the film based on Paul Brickhill's book 'The Dam Busters' mentions his design studio.  Funny, I would have thought the design studio was elsewhere (unless it's a reproduction).

They're remaking the Dam Busters film, I wonder if they will still call the dog 'Nigger', the code-word for the operation, or will they change it.  I guess to be PC, they might need to have female crewmembers too!  Hmmm, history, it's as much as reflection of today, as my history teacher sort of said once.

Great idea though, the geometric.  Wellington's were probably the only bomber to be used the entire war period, and for significant periods before and after too.  Their ability to sustain damage was legendary.

Edited to add:

Oh, he began his work at Vicker's by designing airships.  His most famous one was the R100.  In the 1920's the new socalist government of Britain decided to prove that socialism could beat capitalism, that public enterprise was better than private enterprise.  To do this, and to gain a  lead in world technology, a great competition was announced.  A private team, and a public team would both design an airship, to bring the Empire together.  The private team ran on a shoe-string, whilst the public team was given as much money as it needed, to prove that the public airship was better.  They also had as much public interference in their work as one could dream of, such as not allowing them the superior German engines they wanted, or to delay launch to fix problems.  The private team, with Barnes Wallis, could do what they liked, within their narrow budget.

Wallis's R100 was given the inferior route of London to New York, whilst the R101, the public airship, had the superior route of London to Delhi (how times have changed!).  The R100 made the trip, albeit with problems.  The R101 crashed in France, killing most of the people on board.  The government, embaressed by the failure of public enterprise to beat private, despite the vast sums spent, had the R100 destroyed, and that was the end of the British airship industry. 

  • Member since
    January 2003
  • From: Barrow in Furness, Cumbria, UK.
Posted by davros on Sunday, April 22, 2007 2:21 PM

You got it, Osher.

Incidently; Barnes Wallis also worked on the Tallboy and Grand Slam bombs as well as the Upkeep Mine. He did work at Vickers here in my home town. In the Dambusters film they do mention Vickers.

Regarding the new film: not only would they have to look at the points you mention; they would have to figure a way to fit in an American to save the dayBig Smile [:D]

Now over to you to set the next one

  • Member since
    April 2003
  • From: Edgware, London
Posted by osher on Sunday, April 22, 2007 3:32 PM

Funny, I thought Barnes Wallis at first! I couldn't remember if he had designed Tall Boy and Grand Slam, been ages since I read the book.

OK, my question:

In the last 25 years, the American military have used a number of British or European designed aircraft.  Some were just imported, some were re-designed for the American market and built in America. Three of them (although I can only think of 3), are in fact, designs based on older designs.  One was just a basic upgrade to existing, and successful design family.  Another was based on the principles of it's radical predecessor.  The 3rd was based on a prototype family of 9, which was advanced enough to have a 'proper' name given to it, although it didn't enter full production, but it did prove enough to enable a re-design to enter production.

So, 3 aircraft, all were used by the American military in the last 25 years.  All entered service with their host nations in the 1960's or 1970's.  All of originally European or British design.

  • Member since
    December 2002
  • From: Northern California
Posted by jeaton01 on Sunday, April 22, 2007 4:19 PM
The Harrier almost has to be among the top 3.

John

To see build logs for my models:  http://goldeneramodel.com/mymodels/mymodels.html

 

  • Member since
    April 2003
  • From: Edgware, London
Posted by osher on Sunday, April 22, 2007 4:27 PM
 jeaton01 wrote:
The Harrier almost has to be among the top 3.
Remember, I'm not looking for the aircraft that served, but their predecessors...  So, if you think Harrier, what preceded the Harrier?
  • Member since
    January 2003
  • From: Barrow in Furness, Cumbria, UK.
Posted by davros on Sunday, April 22, 2007 4:27 PM
The C-23 Sherpa might be one of the others. Based on the Short 330 made in Belfast, Northern Ireland.
  • Member since
    April 2003
  • From: Edgware, London
Posted by osher on Sunday, April 22, 2007 4:40 PM

 davros wrote:
The C-23 Sherpa might be one of the others. Based on the Short 330 made in Belfast, Northern Ireland.
That's the great thing about this quiz, you learn a lot!  Nice try, but looking up the Sherpa, it never entered service with it's host nation, that is, it never served, in any form from Skyvan onwards, with the RAF.  Still, interesting service record.

  • Member since
    January 2003
  • From: Barrow in Furness, Cumbria, UK.
Posted by davros on Sunday, April 22, 2007 5:33 PM
 osher wrote:

 davros wrote:
The C-23 Sherpa might be one of the others. Based on the Short 330 made in Belfast, Northern Ireland.
That's the great thing about this quiz, you learn a lot!  Nice try, but looking up the Sherpa, it never entered service with it's host nation, that is, it never served, in any form from Skyvan onwards, with the RAF.  Still, interesting service record.

Can you clarify the question please? Do you mean: 'All entered MILITARY service with their host nations' rather than 'All entered service with their host nations'?

  • Member since
    April 2003
  • From: Edgware, London
Posted by osher on Sunday, April 22, 2007 5:49 PM
 davros wrote:
 osher wrote:

 davros wrote:
The C-23 Sherpa might be one of the others. Based on the Short 330 made in Belfast, Northern Ireland.
That's the great thing about this quiz, you learn a lot!  Nice try, but looking up the Sherpa, it never entered service with it's host nation, that is, it never served, in any form from Skyvan onwards, with the RAF.  Still, interesting service record.

Can you clarify the question please? Do you mean: 'All entered MILITARY service with their host nations' rather than 'All entered service with their host nations'?

 

Ah, yes, that's what I meant, but you know, yeah, let's include the C-23, and it's predecessor, the Short 330.  Cool, one down, two to get!  Well done Davros! 

  • Member since
    December 2002
  • From: Northern California
Posted by jeaton01 on Sunday, April 22, 2007 10:57 PM

 osher wrote:
 jeaton01 wrote:
The Harrier almost has to be among the top 3.
Remember, I'm not looking for the aircraft that served, but their predecessors...  So, if you think Harrier, what preceded the Harrier?

That would be the P.1127, Kestrel.

John

To see build logs for my models:  http://goldeneramodel.com/mymodels/mymodels.html

 

  • Member since
    August 2005
  • From: Sydney, Australia
Posted by Phil_H on Sunday, April 22, 2007 11:48 PM

I'll throw in the T-45 Goshawk, based on the BAe Hawk series.

If you were to go beyond the "25 year" timeframe, you could include the B57 series, based on the Canberra.

If you were to include helos, the HH-65 Dolphin fits.

And if you really want to stretch it, one could argue that the F-21, (IAI Kfir) has its origins in the Mirage family.

But I doubt these are what you're looking for specifically.

  • Member since
    April 2003
  • From: Edgware, London
Posted by osher on Monday, April 23, 2007 8:05 AM

OK, the 3 I had in mind were:

Harrier, based on the Kestrel (itself based on the P.1127)

F-21 Lion, based on the Nesher (itself based on the Mirage III)

T-45 Goshawk, an Americanised version of the Hawk, who's design philosophy was based on the Folland Gnat

As always, this forum surprises with things you didn't know...  Hmmm, a few people had a one here or there, but, I'm going to plump for Phil, for the P.1127/Kestrel and the Mirage III.  Phil, over to you  (the B-57 was an Americanised version of the Canberra, but that was a wholy original design, although one could argue, it was a jet version of the Mosquito)

  • Member since
    August 2005
  • From: Sydney, Australia
Posted by Phil_H on Monday, April 23, 2007 10:53 AM

Ok, I'm not too good with trivia questions, but I'll give it a shot.

This one should be fairly easy...

I'll follow a similar theme to the previous question...

Quite different in design and nation of origin. both of these aircraft were designed to perform the same basic role in military use, but the aircraft from which each was derived were originally designed for a different purpose.

If this is too cryptic, I'll add that both are powered by the same number of engines, and that the aircraft from which they were derived share a number of parallels.

  • Member since
    April 2003
  • From: Edgware, London
Posted by osher on Monday, April 23, 2007 9:19 PM
Hmmm, this could be a few, so, here goes:

Spitfire and BF-109. One has it's origins in seaplanes, the other gliders

JU-388 and the Wellington Mk.V, both twin engine high altitude derivatives of bombers with different design philosophies

Hawk and Talon. The Talon grew out of the F-5 programme, and so was a trainer derived from a fighter. The Hawk, similiar in nature, was purpose designed as a trainer, although it could be argued it came from the Gnat, which was designed as a lightweight fighter.

The FW-200 Condor and the Privateer. The Condor was an airliner that was re-designed into a long-range maritime aircraft. The Privateer was a bomber, re-designed to be a long-range maritime aircraft.

Victor and KC-135. One was a bomber, re-formed into a tanker. The other, an airliner, rdesigned into a tanker.

Any of these?
  • Member since
    August 2005
  • From: Sydney, Australia
Posted by Phil_H on Monday, April 23, 2007 11:31 PM

I hadn't thought of so many, but you haven't got it yet.

I'll add that the aircraft I'm looking for are both currently in service with their respective nations, and that whilst one has never been exported, the other has been a successful export.

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • From: San Francisco, CA
Posted by telsono on Tuesday, April 24, 2007 10:59 AM

I'll guess, first the B-24 Liberator that was derived from flying boats

and the Dornier D0-17 that was derived from a fast mail aircraft.

There would be also the FIAT BR.20 derived from a passenger aircraft and used as a medium bomber and sold to Japan.

Comment to Osher's post, the Macchi Csatoldi fighter series was derived also from floatplane racers like the Spitfire and was a main competitor to it in the Schneider Cup races. The FW-200 was pretty much the same aircraft from civilian use with the addition on the armament and ventral gondola. It had structural problems since the design wasn't strengthen for military use.

Mike T.

Beware the hobby that eats.  - Ben Franklin

Do not fear mistakes. You will know failure. Continue to reach out. - Ben Franklin

The U.S. Constitution  doesn't guarantee happiness, only the pursuit of it. You have to catch up with it yourself. - Ben Franklin

  • Member since
    August 2005
  • From: Sydney, Australia
Posted by Phil_H on Tuesday, April 24, 2007 11:16 AM
 telsono wrote:

I'll guess, first the B-24 Liberator that was derived from flying boats

and the Dornier D0-17 that was derived from a fast mail aircraft.

There would be also the FIAT BR.20 derived from a passenger aircraft and used as a medium bomber and sold to Japan.

Sorry, none of the above. My last clue said that the two that I'm looking for are currently in use by their respective nations of origin - that should narrow the field considerably.

JOIN OUR COMMUNITY!

Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.

SEARCH FORUMS
FREE NEWSLETTER
By signing up you may also receive reader surveys and occasional special offers. We do not sell, rent or trade our email lists. View our Privacy Policy.